This will answer 99% of your questions about 9/11.

a reply to: Enderdog

Thats really awful that they have developed Cancers but cancer rates are pretty high and unless it can be proven that they got their cancers due to radioactive exposure they were exposed to in the aftermath of 9/11 then it doesn't really prove anything its just a very sad situation that three of the 8 developed cancers.

a reply to: dfnj2015

These tiny model experiments are neat but I'm not sure that a scaled down model can adequately simulate force, weight, mass and the distruction of all of it in one big mess or almost no mess in the case of scaled down models.

If you could drop one of the twin towers onto the ground from say a thousand feet, it would wind up in a pile of rubble no doubt but if you drop a tiny scale of it so small that you can hold in your hand from from a thousand feet, there probably would be zero damage.

Scale down the amount of fuel that was on the aircraft and ignite it inside an equally scaled down tower that you can hold in your hand and you'd get a tiny flash burn with almost zero damage.

The lighter something is it becomes more indestructable with impact if it is the moving object hitting something else but more distructable when hit by another object.

I can't believe its been 17 years since 911. It all still seems like a couple of years ago to me.

originally posted by: one4all

capish



Underneath the nose of the plane you will see a black spot with a light spot above and below it. That dark spot is a car.

The plane is the right size for the distance and angle. Capish?

originally posted by: Fallingdown
Personally I don't think today is the proper time for this circular discussion. Today is a day of respect not a day of another endless argument over this subject .

Respect? To respect what? What people call respect is just to sweep under the rug the obvious corruption.

a reply to: return35

I’m getting tired of everyone replying with the same type of statement .

The respect was also for you guys. Because I think truthers are nuts.

Which theory do you subscribe to?
Was at nukes in the basement?
Was it controlled demolition?
Were the planes holograms?
Was it a laser beam from space?
Was it thermite?

You guys should argue with each other and get settled on one conclusion. Then look me up .

I would say all of the conspiracy theories would be out to rest if the government would do a full disclosure instead of worrying about national security first. Our government is protecting key figures in our government who were involved or part of or failed to act on it.

originally posted by: TacoLoco75
I would say all of the conspiracy theories would be out to rest if the government would do a full disclosure instead of worrying about national security first. Our government is protecting key figures in our government who were involved or part of or failed to act on it.

You mean silence people that believe in WTC CD when there is zero evidence of CD. As in science really shut up the flat earth movement.

Theories like CD are about playing to the delusional that will believe in WTC CD no matter what for notoriety, book sales, donations, web site hits, and likes on YouTube.

Government is not the only one running a scam. The truth movement is full of con artists too.

Does anyone know why 9-11 resembles 911 (the emergency number)?

a reply to: soulwaxer

well, it has gone how you predicted it would go: flood and 9/11 nukes deniers! :-)

perhaps 9/11 conspiracy nuts who have chosen to believe ae911-so-called-for-truth are more enslaved to their belief, actually false belief! :-)

originally posted by: Claymation213
Does anyone know why 9-11 resembles 911 (the emergency number)?

Because it happened on 9/11.....

originally posted by: Claymation213
Does anyone know why 9-11 resembles 911 (the emergency number)?

For most of the world that date is expressed as 11/9/01, not 9/11/01 so it's a bit of a stretch to try to find any correlation between the US emergency number and the US format of the date of the event. It could be a bit of intentional irony by the planners of the attack but that's about all it is, or simply coincident. What if that day hadn't been ideal weather for VFR flying due to fog or whatever?

a reply to: Pilgrum

Hmm. I see. I see.

originally posted by: neutronflux

You mean silence people that believe in WTC CD when there is zero evidence of CD. As in science really shut up the flat earth movement.

That's right. The WTC1 and WTC2 towers were blown up from the top downwards, not from the bottom, as in CD. That's why the floors did not pancake, as at first widely reported.

Instead of using strawman arguments (WTC1 & WTC2 were NOT CD of the conventional kind) and empty rhetoric, try debunking the real evidence for 9/11 being a conspiracy instead of your fake version of what is presented as evidence. You won't be able to do this.

a reply to: soulwaxer

Signs of thermite use was found in every dust sample taken. Nano particles that can only be created in a thermite reaction (is what I heard).

a reply to: nOraKat

Thermite is iron oxide nd aluminum

Iron oxide = rusted steel

Aluminum - WTC buildings were clad with aluminum panels

Your mythical thermite composed of materials which ere common to the building site, Considering the violence of
collapse would expect to find iron oxides and aluminum particles in every dust sample

Have to do better than this …..

You lose

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: nOraKat

Thermite is iron oxide nd aluminum

Iron oxide = rusted steel

Aluminum - WTC buildings were clad with aluminum panels

Your mythical thermite composed of materials which ere common to the building site, Considering the violence of
collapse would expect to find iron oxides and aluminum particles in every dust sample

Have to do better than this …..

You lose

Circumventing the evidence that is NANOscaled thermitic material by existence of rust and aluminium panels in these structures does not jive, would you agree?

- Why were fighter jets sent towards the Atlantic Ocean and not towards New York city?

If you still have this question 17 years later, whatever "research" you've done since 2004 has been garbage and a complete waste of your time.

a reply to: dfnj2015

People will simply not accept the truth because they can't live in World where their delusions are so unraveled.

That, or they're just gullible and stupid.

a reply to: firerescue

The evidence I was referring to was large quantities of **SPHERICAL** nano-sized iron rich particles found in every dust sample taken which can only be produced in super high temperature reactions such as thermite reactions.

911research.wtc7.net...

As usual, we search for possible prosaic explanations for these metallic sphericules in the WTC dust. The most obvious possible source is the melting of large quantities of steel in the buildings followed somehow by formation of tiny droplets of molten steel. As discussed above, however, steel melts at about 1538 ºC (2800 ºF) “ and the temperatures in the buildings were no where near hot enough to melt steel, and certainly not in large quantities required for the amounts seen in the dust

- Dr. Steven E. Jones describing molten metal seen at Ground Zero

A paper published a year earlier than Active Thermitic Material Discovered showed that metal-rich spheroids in WTC dust had iron-to-oxygen ratios indicating abundant elemental iron, such as found in thermite residues. It also pointed out several other features of WTC remains that indicated exposure to temperatures far above what could be produced by fires burning jet fuel and office contents, including: iron-rich and silicate spherules, .. a molybdenum spherule, .. Molybdenum has a very high melting point of 2617 ºC.

This is pretty clever -->

Seeing is believing !



He creates an unrealistic model of the building with much weaker supports made out of plastic, and it still doesn't free fall.

Take a look you unbelievers.